[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

CVS, Bugzilla, and PkgDB inconsistencies (was: Fedora Package Status of Aug 30, 2007)

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:16:27 +0200, Christian Iseli wrote:
>>  - 5 packages present in the development repo which have no owners
>>  entry

>> audacious-docklet

This one depends on how you parse the tree. :)  audacious-docklet is
the name of the package and spec file, but the name of the cvs module,
bugzilla component, and pkgdb entry is audacious-plugins-docklet.
Ideally things would be renamed to match.  The review is here:


It seems that it was supposed to be renamed but it hasn't been done
completely.  The module was renamed, but the spec file and name of the
package wasn't.  Interestingly, there's a request in the review bug
from upstream asking NOT to distribute this package:


So shouldn't this package be EOL'd?

>> s390utils

There's no CVS module.  There's an empty merge review:


Is this in any supported Fedora arches?  I thought it was only for
s390 and s390x arches?

>> stardict-dic

This package was split into several subpackages:


It was removed from cvs, but not from bugzilla.  It seems that it
should be.

>> sturmbahnfahrer

This was renamed to stormbaancoureur:


The files in the sturmbahnfahrer CVS module should be removed and a
dead.package added.  It should also be removed from the bugzilla
components list for any releases where it was never built.

>>  ufsparse
> "no owners entry" means only the pkgdb admins can do something about
> it. But ufsparse is active in cvs for example.

ufsparse was renamed to suitesparse:

Same story as sturmbahnfahrer: files should be removed, dead.package
added, bugzilla component dropped (again, for any releases for which
it was never built).

While we're on the subject, I ran across a few things while tracking
license tag changes that seem to need similar clean up.

The following modules have a dead.package file, along with other


The files other than the dead.package file should be removed from CVS
I think.

Then there's the ws-common-utils module.  The package name and spec
file are named ws-commons-util, which also exists as a module in CVS,
both names are in bugzilla.  The review request shows some confusion
by using both names at various places:


One or the other should be removed from CVS and bugzilla.  I'd say it
is ws-common-utils, since the actual package name is ws-commons-util.

Finally, what's up with the glibc{32,64} modules?  Were they ever
used?  Are they needed in CVS still or can they be dropped?  (They're
not in bugzilla or the pkgdb, nor in the repos.)

Sheesh, that's about enough bugzilla for me tonight. ;)

Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
The only reason we still have elections in this country is to see if
the pollsters were right.
    -- Ed Rollins

Attachment: pgp2YaBsCIoZS.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]